Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

immich.app

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 713 posts

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#131

Post by ngold »

lukan wrote: post #93
gmueckl wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A part of the issue is IMO that browsers have become ridiculously bloated everything-programs. You could take about 90% of that out and into dedicated tools and end up with something vastly saner and safer and not a lot less capable for all practical purposes. Instead, we collectively are OK with frosting this atrocious layer cake that is today's web with multiple flavors of security measures of sometimes questionabl…

"You could take about 90% of that out and into dedicated tools " But then you would loose plattform independency, the main selling point of this atrocity. Having all those APIs in a sandbox that mostly just work on billion devices is pretty powerful and a potential succesor to HTML would have to beat that, to be adopted. The best thing to happen, that I can see, is that a sane subset crystalizes, that people start to…

Not sure if it counts but I've been enjoying librewolf. I believe just a stripped down firefox.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#132

Post by goxofy »

david_van_loon wrote: post #91
arccy wrote: post #8

If you're going to host user content on subdomains, then you should probably have your site on the Public Suffix List https://publicsuffix.org/list/ . That should eventually make its way into various services so they know that a tainted subdomain doesn't taint the entire site....

The issue isn't the user-hosted content - I'm running a release build of Immich on my own server and Google flagged my entire domain.

[dead]

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#133

Post by zackify »

The open internet is done. Monopolies control everything.

We have an iOS app in the store for 3 years and out of the blue apple is demanding we provide new licenses that don’t exist and threaten to kick our app out. Nothing changed in 3 years.

Getting sick of these companies able to have this level of control over everything, you can’t even self host anymore apparently.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#136

Post by liqilin1567 »

thayne wrote: post #96
arccy wrote: post #8

If you're going to host user content on subdomains, then you should probably have your site on the Public Suffix List https://publicsuffix.org/list/ . That should eventually make its way into various services so they know that a tainted subdomain doesn't taint the entire site....

Looking through some of the links in this post, I there are actually two separate issues here: 1. Immich hosts user content on their domain. And should thus be on the public suffic list. 2. When users host an open source self hosted project like immich, jellyfin, etc. on their own domain it gets flagged as phishing because it looks an awful lot like the publicly hosted version, but it's on a different domain, and pos…

That means the Safe Browsing abuse could be weaponized against self-hosted services, oh my...

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#137

Post by com2kid »

gmueckl wrote: post #109
lukan wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"You could take about 90% of that out and into dedicated tools " But then you would loose plattform independency, the main selling point of this atrocity. Having all those APIs in a sandbox that mostly just work on billion devices is pretty powerful and a potential succesor to HTML would have to beat that, to be adopted. The best thing to happen, that I can see, is that a sane subset crystalizes, that people start to…

But do we need e.g serial port or raw USB access straight from a random website? Even WebRTC is a bit of a stretch. There is a lot of cruft in modern browsers that does little except increase attack surface. This all just drives a need to come up with ever more tacked-on protection schemes because browsers have big targets painted on them.

Itch.io games and controller support.

You have sites now that let you debug microcontrollers on your browser, super cool.

Same thing but with firmware updates in the browser. Cross platform, replaced a mess of ugly broken vendor tools.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#138

Post by userbinator »

stonogo wrote: post #58
elphinstone wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are not the government and should not have this vast, unaccountable monopoly power with no accountability and no customer service.

the government probably shouldn't either?

At least the government is normally elected.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#139

Post by Kim_Bruning »

gmueckl wrote: post #76
lukan wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The engineering equivalent of a car made of duct tape" Kind of. But do you have a better proposition?

A part of the issue is IMO that browsers have become ridiculously bloated everything-programs. You could take about 90% of that out and into dedicated tools and end up with something vastly saner and safer and not a lot less capable for all practical purposes. Instead, we collectively are OK with frosting this atrocious layer cake that is today's web with multiple flavors of security measures of sometimes questionabl…

Are you saying we should make a A large set of really simple tools that each do one thing really really really pedantically well?

This might be what's needed to break out of the current local optimum.

Re: Google flags Immich sites as dangerous

#140

Post by throwaway-0001 »

I’m also self hosting gitea and pertainer and I’m trying this issue every few weeks. I appeal, they remove the warning, after a week is back. This is ongoing for at least 4 years. I have more than 20 appeals all successfully removing the warning. Ridiculous. I heard legal action is the best option now, any other ideas?
Post reply on HN